Gun myth? Way back in the 80s, interstate carry illegal.

This is a discussion on Gun myth? Way back in the 80s, interstate carry illegal. within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I'm not quite old enough to know what the applicable laws WERE back in the early 80s. I was more concerned with teenager stuff back ...

Gun myth? Way back in the 80s, interstate carry illegal.

I'm not quite old enough to know what the applicable laws WERE back in the early 80s. I was more concerned with teenager stuff back then. So...

I've had heard story a from a respected and credible Deputy that back in those days that some Virginia LEOs on a Blue Knights bike ride got pulled over by a North Carolina LEO in Murfreesboro circa early 80s. As the story goes, they all whipped out their "get out of trouble free" shields and IDed themselves. This apparently didn't impress the lone NC LEO; all their duty weapons were seized and they were charged and convicted of transporting firearms across state lines. Supposedly that haul provided a significant upgrade and supplement to the Murfreesboro NC PD for several years.

I've never heard of that story before. Maybe it's true, maybe not. Prior to the passage in 2004 of HR 218, the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA), the legality of an officers carry of a weapon into another state when not on official business was dependant on how the law in the visited state read and the discretion of the officer in that jurisdiction. In Arkansas for example, it only required that one be a "certified officer" to carry off-duty. It did not specify that one be certified in Arkansas.

Even today If A LEO carries or brings a fire arm on a federal post with out permission they can end up locked up a long time. Saw a couple that felt different get in a lot of trouble.
No days most neighboring states have agreements to cover things like this.

Sturgis rally a few years back, some 'visiting ' officers were pulled over and found to be carrying .... they thought they were OK to carry, they weren't . They were arrested and charged. Eventually guns were returned and charges dropped, but told not to ever do it again. Since then, I believe the law changed and they would be legal to carry now.

I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers --- Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

I've not heard the story, but it certainly could have been true. I've heard that there was a Supreme Court Case which
upheld the felony conviction of a NYC cop who was caught carrying in NJ. So, this story does have a ring of "it could be true"
to it.

LEOSA was passed during the second Bush admin; no doubt in partial response to the absurdities of the prior situation.

If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
Andrew Jackson

Sturgis rally a few years back, some 'visiting ' officers were pulled over and found to be carrying .... they thought they were OK to carry, they weren't . They were arrested and charged. Eventually guns were returned and charges dropped, but told not to ever do it again. Since then, I believe the law changed and they would be legal to carry now.

I'm not sure we are talking about the same incident but one that I recall involving Sturgis went like this:

During the rally at Sturgis an off-duty officer from a pacific coast state got into a confrontation with a group of outlaw bikers. During the confrontation he shot one of them. He was arrested and charged with unlawful carry. His attorney raised HR218 as a defense to the charge. The courts ruled that HR218 exempted the officer from the charge of unlawful carry.

On a second point, yes the badge can and does matter outside the jurisdiction as established by HR218. In addition, in my state an officer may make an arrest for a felony or misdemeanor that occurs in his presence anywhere in the state. If this arrest happens outside his jurisdiction he has to turn the prisoner over to the agency that has jurisdiction.

Sturgis rally a few years back, some 'visiting ' officers were pulled over and found to be carrying .... they thought they were OK to carry, they weren't . They were arrested and charged. Eventually guns were returned and charges dropped, but told not to ever do it again. Since then, I believe the law changed and they would be legal to carry now.

Before my father retired from law enforcement the city he worked asked they police to also carry off duty. When I asked my father why he did not do this he told me that if he happened to get stopped outside of town he would be in violation of the law.

I've not heard the story, but it certainly could have been true. I've heard that there was a Supreme Court Case which
upheld the felony conviction of a NYC cop who was caught carrying in NJ. So, this story does have a ring of "it could be true"
to it.

LEOSA was passed during the second Bush admin; no doubt in partial response to the absurdities of the prior situation.

We will have to disagree on the so called absurdities. I do not believe that any citizen should be granted special rights simply because they might hold a position within the government. This country was never meant to allow those in government special treatment. The government was even barred from granting titles of nobility for that reason. We were meant to be equals.

The Gun Control Act of 1968 barred the interstate transport of loaded, accessible weapons, unless the state exempted.

And LEOSA is the law, mlr1m, like it or not.

Yup its a law, doesn't mean its right. Or, for that matter it doesn't mean that we should go along with the idea that certain groups should have their own special laws. I prefer being equal and having the government treating me as such.

HR 2900 has the potential to severely rock ALL federal and state firearm laws.

Article 6 Clause 2 states that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Both Federal and State governments appear to cherry pick this bit.

The 10 Amendment allows the states to pass laws that are not prohibited to them. They have taken this to mean they can legislate firearms as the wish.

Then there just happens to be the pesky 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment is an integral part of the Constitution. Therefore combining Article 6 Clause 2 and the 2nd Amendment means neither the Federal or State governments have the authority to legislate firearms. Make no mistake. The 10th Amendment does NOT negate the 2nd Amendment as many states have done. Likewise Federally, the abuse of the Commerce Clause does NOT negate the 2nd Amendment.

I'm not sure we are talking about the same incident but one that I recall involving Sturgis went like this:

During the rally at Sturgis an off-duty officer from a pacific coast state got into a confrontation with a group of outlaw bikers. During the confrontation he shot one of them. He was arrested and charged with unlawful carry. His attorney raised HR218 as a defense to the charge. The courts ruled that HR218 exempted the officer from the charge of unlawful carry.

On a second point, yes the badge can and does matter outside the jurisdiction as established by HR218. In addition, in my state an officer may make an arrest for a felony or misdemeanor that occurs in his presence anywhere in the state. If this arrest happens outside his jurisdiction he has to turn the prisoner over to the agency that has jurisdiction.

I remember that incident,but one of the guys in the LEO group that was carrying was a fireman,the court ruled he did not fall under HR218 and last I remember he was charged with unlawful possession of a concealed handgun.

Sturgis rally a few years back, some 'visiting ' officers were pulled over and found to be carrying .... they thought they were OK to carry, they weren't . They were arrested and charged. Eventually guns were returned and charges dropped, but told not to ever do it again. Since then, I believe the law changed and they would be legal to carry now.

We will have to disagree on the so called absurdities. I do not believe that any citizen should be granted special rights simply because they might hold a position within the government. This country was never meant to allow those in government special treatment. The government was even barred from granting titles of nobility for that reason. We were meant to be equals.

Michael

I don't quite have a firm idea of your position. Are you opposed to LEOSA? Opposed to that and also to HR 822? Opposed to all
CHL requirements?

I'm not sure where you stand. Seems to me, LEOSA was a necessary change and improvement; as was FOPA, as will be 822 if it gets passed.

I don't see any connection between LEOSA and "titles of nobility." I can understand why some might draw that connection, but
really the comparison is quite lacking, IMO. If nothing else, titles of nobility are entirely lacking in any merit save genetics. LEOSA is based on past job experience. If you took your analogy to its greatest extreme there are all manner of job positions and categories which are licensed. These licenses are distinctly different from titles of nobility. And the main distinction is
they are earned in one fashion or another, not merely conferred and inherited. A Governor is hardly in possession of a title of nobility, though he is in possession of both a title and privilege which go with the title. The recipient of a doctoral degree from a state university has a title, but not a "title of nobility."

If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
Andrew Jackson